Marketing v. Sales: How To Solve Organizational Conflict

I've seen and heard it a hundred times in companies big and small. I'm talking about organizational conflict -- the seemingly endless animosity, finger-pointing, and disruptive churn that plagues most companies.

It falls into three equally counterproductive and destructive categories:

1. Between so-called rival groups, like marketing and sales
2. Targeted at one particular group, usually a support function like IT, HR, or finance
3. Against an organizational caste, such as the "execs," "CEO," or "factory workers"

I've heard it characterized as "normal tension" or an "age-old debate," as if it's an inevitable feud between warring families or clashing cultures. Not true. There's nothing normal or inevitable about it; it's dysfunctional organizational behavior and there are ways to minimize it.

There are scalable and flexible processes that, when implemented properly by executives that know what they're doing, minimize the negative effects of organizational conflict while promoting healthy conflict and consensus on real business issues.

By the way, I didn't just read about all this. I was a senior executive at companies big (National Semiconductor) and small (Rambus) that had excellent processes that worked. Today let's look at the first type of conflict:

Rival Groups: Marketing vs. Sales
The Problem

Marketing and sales are always going after each other, like the proverbial "dogs" versus "cats" rivalry, only in the corporate world. Actually, that's not a bad analogy. There are harmonious multi-pet homes, but it takes training and discipline. The same goes for organizations.

The real problem is this: in most companies, executives submit proposed annual goals to the CEO. Perhaps there's a round or two of iterations, but only one-on-one, not with peers. As a result there's little, if any, alignment between groups. This process is replicated throughout the management chain, like reinforcing bad behavior. Believe it or not, this is at the core of the problem.

An iterative process of goal alignment and measurement that occurs at each management level, starting with the executive management team.

Each executive still develops proposed goals as part of an annual operating planning process. What's different is that each executive presents this to the entire exec staff, which leads to open debate and eventual consensus over the course of several iterations.

Some goals can literally be shared between groups. For example, if you're going to launch a product, there's no reason why sales and marketing shouldn't share certain success metrics as components of their goals and bonus plan.

Measurement occurs quarterly and in a similar manner â€" executives present their own scores and debate until consensus is reached. This usually follows a quarterly business or operating review attended by all relevant executive, business, marketing and sales personnel. That way everybody is clear on what really happened during the quarter.

The first year may require a facilitator with experience at driving consensus, plus reinforcement by the CEO, but it rapidly becomes second nature.

As with any process, documentation and communication is critical. Once the executive staff has done its thing, the process is then replicated down through the management chain so goals and metrics are consistent and aligned at each level.

Now it's your turn: Got an organizational conflict horror story? Solutions are even better.